Here is the body of a post I made on stackoverflow, but it seems to be a
non-obvious issue. I was hoping someone here might be able to shed light
on it...
On my 32-bit Windows Vista machine I notice a significant (5x) slowdown
when taking the absolute values of a fairly large
On 4/10/12 6:44 AM, Henry Gomersall wrote:
Here is the body of a post I made on stackoverflow, but it seems to be
a non-obvious issue. I was hoping someone here might be able to shed
light on it...
On my 32-bit Windows Vista machine I notice a significant (5x)
slowdown when taking the
On 10/04/2012 16:36, Francesc Alted wrote:
In [10]: timeit c = numpy.complex64(numpy.abs(numpy.complex128(b)))
100 loops, best of 3: 12.3 ms per loop
In [11]: timeit c = numpy.abs(b)
100 loops, best of 3: 8.45 ms per loop
in your windows box and see if they raise similar results?
No, the
On 4/10/12 9:55 AM, Henry Gomersall wrote:
On 10/04/2012 16:36, Francesc Alted wrote:
In [10]: timeit c = numpy.complex64(numpy.abs(numpy.complex128(b)))
100 loops, best of 3: 12.3 ms per loop
In [11]: timeit c = numpy.abs(b)
100 loops, best of 3: 8.45 ms per loop
in your windows box and
On Tue, Apr 10, 2012 at 12:57 PM, Francesc Alted franc...@continuum.iowrote:
On 4/10/12 9:55 AM, Henry Gomersall wrote:
On 10/04/2012 16:36, Francesc Alted wrote:
In [10]: timeit c = numpy.complex64(numpy.abs(numpy.complex128(b)))
100 loops, best of 3: 12.3 ms per loop
In [11]: timeit
On 10/04/2012 17:57, Francesc Alted wrote:
I'm using numexpr in the end, but this is slower than numpy.abs under linux.
Oh, you mean the windows version of abs(complex64) in numexpr is slower
than a pure numpy.abs(complex64) under linux? That's weird, because
numexpr has an independent
On 4/10/12 11:43 AM, Henry Gomersall wrote:
On 10/04/2012 17:57, Francesc Alted wrote:
I'm using numexpr in the end, but this is slower than numpy.abs under linux.
Oh, you mean the windows version of abs(complex64) in numexpr is slower
than a pure numpy.abs(complex64) under linux? That's
